TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessing gender bias in qualitative evaluations of surgical residents
AU - Gerull, Katherine M.
AU - Loe, Maren
AU - Seiler, Kristen
AU - McAllister, Jared
AU - Salles, Arghavan
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was partially funded by the National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, NIH , through Grant 5 KL2 RR025743 .
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018
PY - 2019/2
Y1 - 2019/2
N2 - Background: There are notable disparities in the training, recruitment, promotion, and evaluation of men and women in surgery. The qualitative assessment of surgical residents may be implicitly gender biased. Methods: We used inductive analysis to identify themes in written evaluations of residents. We also performed a content analysis of words fitting previously defined communal, grindstone, ability, and standout categories. Results: Differences in themes that emerged from evaluations of male and female residents were notable regarding overall performance, references to the future, professional competency, job domains, disposition and humanism, and overall tone of evaluations. Comments about men were more positive than those about women, and evaluations of men included more standout words. Conclusions: The more positive evaluations of men may handicap women if they are seen as less likely to perform well based on these evaluations. These differences suggest that implicit bias may play a role in the qualitative evaluation of surgical residents.
AB - Background: There are notable disparities in the training, recruitment, promotion, and evaluation of men and women in surgery. The qualitative assessment of surgical residents may be implicitly gender biased. Methods: We used inductive analysis to identify themes in written evaluations of residents. We also performed a content analysis of words fitting previously defined communal, grindstone, ability, and standout categories. Results: Differences in themes that emerged from evaluations of male and female residents were notable regarding overall performance, references to the future, professional competency, job domains, disposition and humanism, and overall tone of evaluations. Comments about men were more positive than those about women, and evaluations of men included more standout words. Conclusions: The more positive evaluations of men may handicap women if they are seen as less likely to perform well based on these evaluations. These differences suggest that implicit bias may play a role in the qualitative evaluation of surgical residents.
KW - Evaluation
KW - Gender bias
KW - Performance review
KW - Qualitative
KW - Residency
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055034661&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85055034661&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.09.029
DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.09.029
M3 - Article
C2 - 30343879
AN - SCOPUS:85055034661
SN - 0002-9610
VL - 217
SP - 306
EP - 313
JO - American journal of surgery
JF - American journal of surgery
IS - 2
ER -